The Effects of Travel Service Quality on Organization Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Word-Of-Mouth—A study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As company tours have become more popular and received much attention in Vietnam, it is a favorable chance for travel companies and agencies to gain more customers and profits. This study was carried out to investigate the effects of travel service quality, using SERVPERF assessment procedure, on word-of-mouth (WOM) behaviors of the whole organization through the mediation of perceived value and satisfaction, so that further recommendations would be suggested for tourism companies to improve their services. Quantitative approach was applied with questionnaire directly delivered to 300 small to medium-sized companies in Ho Chi Minh City which annually book tours for their staff. Although all variables were positively correlated, only four quality aspects (Empathy, Responsiveness, Tangibles, Assurance) had significant effects on other dependent variables; in particular, empathy was proven to have the most powerful impact on WOM with both direct and indirect effects. Guidelines for travel agencies were recommended; especially, activities which prioritized customers’ needs and fulfilled their requests were most emphasized.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".